All (& only) things that make you say WTF.

1. No Screenshots. 7 day ban for violation!

2. No Personal Information.

All personal information will be removed, offenders banned. This includes, but is not limited to, full names, phone/address, links to Facebook & posts which link to images hosted on Facebook's servers. Anything hosted on Facebook's servers can be traced to the original account holder.

3. No Calls for Public Outcry.

4. No Politics.

Neither posts with political implications, nor politics of any kind are allowed, especially US politics. To see the original post outlining this rule, click here.

5. NSFW posts must be tagged.

If they haven't been marked, they will be removed (and not reinstated).

6. No Superimposed Text.

This includes Captioned Images, Memes, & Demotivational Posters.

7. No Comics.

This includes rage & web comics.

8. No Begging for Upvotes.

No post titles soliciting karma (e.g. "upvote this", or "cakeday".)

9. No Links to Reddit.

This also includes screenshots of Reddit.

10. Gore and Porn are not WTF by default.

They are both allowed here, however please consider posting the more extreme stuff to /r/spacedicks (NSFW).

11. Racism and bigotry are not allowed.

They will result in bans. (Please report them)

12. Novelty accounts and bots are not allowed.

They will be banned. (Please report them)

If you have any questions about the rules, if you're confused about why your post was removed, or if your idea for a post is acceptable; Please Read the 'Guide to WTF' & our Moderator Announcement before contacting us.

The moderators of /r/WTF reserve the right to moderate posts and comments at their discretion, with regard to their perception of the suitability of said posts and comments for this subreddit. Thank you for your understanding.

If you have any questions, comments, or concerns about /r/WTF you can contact us by clicking the 'message the moderators' link, located on the lower right hand side of the page. However, before you do that please check and make sure that your questions or concerns haven't already been answered here.

Now I don't remember where exactly it happened, but it was either Romans or Greeks couple thousand years ago. They built some bridge to cross a river (or was it some sea creek?), but a storm and big waves destroyed it. The builders then held a trial against this sea and sentenced the waves to be whipped 500 times.

Interestingly enough, the Roman Emperor Caligula had the Bay of Naples bridged, in a similar gesture of defiance against the laws of nature. He also had soldiers throw spears and rocks at the English Channel, took some shells back to Rome as tribute, and declared himself victorious over Neptune.

The things about Kim are normally good propaganda, this would be more like if president Obama officially saying Gorge W bush personally was responsible for what happened with Hurricane Katrina because he wanted to rebuild the city of new Orleans into something nice or that he let 9/11 happen to justify new wars, indeed some would say he planned the whole thing. He could also say how debauched of a man he was by having orgy's and killing people he simply did not like.

If we disregard the historical sources, what can we replace them with? Of course the sources are biased... but if we want to dismiss something as a fabrication we need something more than guesswork and probable cause.

Even if he Caligula did half the crazy things he is said to have done he'd still be fairly eccentric.

It's not about disregarding the sources, it's about taking them in a full context and knowing they are telling lies so that others can solidify power and sway the hearts of the roman citizens.

When a senator in the USA makes a statement these days, we can frequently check the recodes and prove they are telling lies, half truths or are otherwise just trying to manipulate people. In Rome it was the same thing, except they did not have the tools we have today.

Just because something is 1800 years old, it does not make it true. the Sumerian list of kings is clearly not telling us the truth when it says a king lived for thousands of years, yet it is a historical document with some proven accuracy and as such is not just dismissed but understood in context of it's time.

Sure, you can dismiss stuff by common sense (the 7 kings of Rome, for example, or Romulus and Remus). But we have to accept that the stories about Caligula I mentioned are probably true. If Tacitus tells us what people were thinking 100 years before he was born he's probably projecting and/or lying, but if he tells us that Caligula built a great bloody bridge across a bay and held a triumph with sea shells... well, on what grounds can we reject his statement?

We can start with the grounds that he has already misrepresented information, thus establishing himself as not a fully trustworthy source source. we can look into the writings having been modified or being simply an edited copy of an original, again leaving a contaminated recode. We can check for other records that confirm or support statements made and obviously we can check archeology when available.

Tacitus writings had many things that are just not correct in them and we have evidence that the writings where edited more then once, at least the copy's we have.

While sometimes things are likely to be true, a triumph that has sea shells in it would not be abnormal considering the history. But the point is we have much evidence that Caligula was the target of a series of smear campaigns

The problem is that textbooks and general university courses that cover the man make the assumptions that the records are more factual then they really are. it all makes a much better story and conforms with the opinion people have.

However from lectures and papers of professors who are actual experts in there respective fields, who do the ground work, research and even archeological work when available. we get a more honest representation.

Now that I think on it a bit though, I find that I am confusing Nero with Caligula again...I do this often and your statements become much more valid and clear.

Too drunk to read needed someone to help so here is the translation for anyone else that enjoys life - "During the eighteenth century books that were considered were sometimes punished by being whipped."

Anyone know if this is true? I know some king whipped the ocean for not listening to him. If the writer had a typo and meant authors or readers, I'm surprised it happened in the era of freedom of speech and the press.